Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Amol Rattan Singh, J.
Anjali & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
State Of Punjab & Ors. – Respondents
CRWP No. 602 of 2022
Decided On : 21-01-2022
Fundamental Right - Protection of Life and Liberty - The court disposed of the petition with a direction to ensure the petitioners' lives and liberty are not harmed, emphasizing that protection of life and liberty is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought protection of life and liberty after marrying against the wishes of certain respondents. The age of the petitioners was not firmly proven, but the court emphasized the fundamental right to protection of life and liberty.
Finding of the Court:
The court disposed of the petition with a direction to ensure the petitioners' lives and liberty are not harmed, emphasizing that protection of life and liberty is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Issues: Protection of life and liberty, validity of marriage, age verification
Ratio Decidendi: The fundamental right to protection of life and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India takes precedence, and age verification is crucial in case of marriage to ensure compliance with the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006.
Final Decision: The petition is disposed of with a direction to ensure the petitioners' lives and liberty are not harmed, emphasizing the fundamental right to protection of life and liberty. The court also highlighted that if any averments made in the petition are found to be incorrect, it shall not be a bar on proceedings initiated as per law.
JUDGMENT
Amol Rattan Singh, J. (Oral) - Case heard by video conferencing.
2. By this petition, the petitioners seek protection of life and liberty at the hands of respondents no.4 to 7, upon the petitioners having married each other (as contended) against the wishes of the said respondents, on 18.01.2022.
3. On a specific query put to learned counsel for the petitioners, it has been stated that neither are the petitioners in any prohibited relationship to each other, nor has any of them been married earlier. He states that he has obtained specific instructions from the petitioners in that regard.
4. There is no firm proof of age of either of the petitioners on record other than the copies of their Aadhar Cards, with an Aadhar Card not being firm proof of age as no firm proof of age is usually asked for at the time of is- suance of such cards.
5. However, since protection of life and liberty is a fundamental right of every citizen under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, without making any comment whatsoever on the validity of the marriage, or otherwise, this petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents no.2 and 3 to ensure that the lives and liberty of the petitioners are not put to any harm or threat at the hands of the aforesaid respondents, or at their behest.
6. Yet, it is made absolutely clear that if, upon verification, the age of either of the petitioners is found to be less than the legally marriageable age prescribed in terms of the provisions of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, this order shall not be construed to be a bar on any proceedings ini- tiated under that Act, the offences committed under the provisions of that Act being cognizable in terms of Section 15 thereof.
7. Further, it is made clear that if any of the averments made in the petition is found to be incorrect, specifically with regard to either the petitioners being in any prohibited relationship to each other, or as regards their previous marital status, this order shall not be construed to be a bar on proceedings initiated as per law.
The fundamental right to protection under Article 21 of the Constitution of India must be upheld, regardless of the validity of the marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of adulthood based on the age of majority and the need to consider revising the age of majority in light of changing circumstance....
The fundamental rights of individuals, as envisaged in the Constitution of India, cannot be deprived solely based on the non-marriageable age of one of the parties involved in a marriage.
The fundamental right to protection under Article 21 of the Constitution of India must be upheld, regardless of the validity of the marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act.
The fundamental right to protection of life and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India must be upheld, regardless of the validity of the marriage.
The fundamental rights of individuals, as envisaged in the Constitution of India, cannot be denied solely based on the non-marriageable age of a party involved in a marriage.
The court can invoke its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. and Article 21 of the Constitution of India to protect the right to life and liberty, based on the age of majority and marria....
The central legal point established in the judgment is that adults in a live-in-relationship are entitled to protection of their life and liberty against any harm from others.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
